Legal Opinion

Trappe v. Bolgard

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided December 2, 2003No. AC 23282PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

2Per curiam

The plaintiff, Wanda Trappe, appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered after it granted the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendants, Robert D. Bolgard and Fleet Bank, N.A. On appeal, the plaintiff appears to claim that the court failed to consider evidence that would demonstrate that the defendants had engaged in a continuing conceal*385ment of facts, which barred the running of the statutes of limitation on her complaint.

Although we attempt to construe the rules of practice liberally in dealing with pro se litigants; see Rosato v. Rosato, 53 Conn. App. 387, 390,…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rosato v. RosatoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
  2. Baris v. Southbend, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2002
  3. Russell v. RussellConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000

4Cited by2 opinions

  1. Verderame v. Trinity Estates Development Corp.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2005
  2. In re William H.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API